Posted on 08/17/2005 5:52:07 AM PDT by Remember_Salamis
And then claim it back under emminent domain after it's paid for. A brilliant scheme.
No wonder it begins with a quote from Woody Guthrie, a vile Communist scumbag who supported 100% government ownership of all land in the USA through outright confiscation.
Didn't I read somewhere that the Fed. Govt. could only own 10 square miles of land, that being the Capitol Bldg etc in Washington D.C.?
The stats are from a Federal Government report! The Feds own a higher percentage of the land in the 50 states than they do in the District of Colombia!
Private property is an illusion.
The house and land I bought is owned by the State.
I can't even get a screen porch built in my backyard without going through all kinds of red tape with the zoning board.
Property taxes also prevents it from being your land. Stop paying them and see how long you live there.
Property taxes also prevents it from being your land. Stop paying them and see how long you live there.
And try not paying property taxes on that land you "own".
That is what I meant when I said the State owns "my" property I paid for.
I find Thomas Jefferson's idea of what the public school system should have been better each day.
The biggest problem concerning Federally owned land is clearly in the western states. It originates mostly from history and not design. The eastern states began as colonies where from the 1600s to the late 1700s land gradually passed from the crown to private hands through charters, land grants and the such.
The western states were acquired wholesale by acts of the Federal government and only became states later. The states maybe could have altered the ownership mix, to more state and less federal ownership, upon statehood. I am not clear on the history of why that did not happen.
But residents of western states should be clear in their understanding that had the state governments acquired most of the land immediately upon getting statehood, there is nothing, historically, to suggest that the "government", via the state governments, would not be the largest landowners in the western states today. Give a government power and it is most likely to try to hang onto it; no matter what the political ideology of those in the government.
Be sure that if you want the FEDERAL government to sell lands in the states that you don't want to allow the state governments to be among the bidders. However, if anyone could ever get such land sales to occur, I doubt you could prevent the state governments from being among the bidders or that the state governments not wind up acquiring most of the land.
Good luck.
This stands to reason, seeing that the federal government was the original owner by purchase/conquest of all the states west of the Mississippi except HI and TX as well as owner by purchase of much of the land east of it.
The federal government owns considerably less of the continental states than it did in 1815.
The fedral government owned 100% of AK - why is it shocking that it still owns 70%?
I'm sure you've read it. However, it remains patently untrue.
Actually, land holdings n the Western States has grown exponentially in the past century or so (after acquisition). hgundreds of millions of acres have been seized as "enviornmental protection zones". Midwestern States, which WERE BOUGHT, have very low federal government ownership ratios. Kansas, Nebraska, Ohio
Illinois, Texas, Indiana, North Dakota, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Missouri, Louisiana, Kentucky, Minnesota
Wisconsin, South Dakota, Arkansas, and Mississippi are all under 10% ownership rates, yet did not get thier land through "the crown".
They once owned 100% of all land West of the Mississippi. My point is that DC is supposed to be THE federal government, but less of it is owned by the feds than the rest of the country.
The boundless claim that the feds are holding land nobody wants to buy is BS.
If the Federal Government wanted to sell it, they COULD EASILY. They could even sell it for $1 and acre and make a lot of the land's value back in tax revenue off the property flip by the prospector.
Tell me about it! I pay 2.25% of my home's value in property taxes every year!
DEA? Embassy?
Should have been written "leases out".
I see. Thanks.
OK, but frankly, that's not much of a point.
The boundless claim that the feds are holding land nobody wants to buy is BS.
I don't think that's a commonly made claim.
Millions of people would love to own national park land, which if I am not mistaken is the bulk of the land in question.
If the Federal Government wanted to sell it, they COULD EASILY.
The government sells land every year. Easily.
They could even sell it for $1 and acre and make a lot of the land's value back in tax revenue off the property flip by the prospector.
The argument against that would be that the federal government's land belongs to the taxpayers and selling land for a dollar an acre would be screwing taxpayers over.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.